Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 :: one page |
|
Author |
Thread Statistics | Show CCP posts - 1 post(s) |
Peadar
Gallente Pillars of Hope
|
Posted - 2008.07.04 06:53:00 -
[1]
Edited by: Peadar on 04/07/2008 06:56:26 CCP's will be nice if you could remove all the meta 1 that the drop npc "Modules, drones and ammunition" to revive an economy can, to unload the market and seek more producers can not forget the invention. Doing a mission relates sufficiently with the bounty, salvage the reward and especially the LP that with only 30k lp fregate the faction that sells 40m. missions runner who embarks on this invention has not produce anything if you can say because they loot while mission and the ore rare there as "Alloys & Compounds" out of the mine or producer who bought the minerals can not compete with the missions runner who sell such a loss meta 1 but not enough to afford to purchase for resale a good price which creates an imbalance. I hope you understand what I mean and that my request will attract your attention. |
RaTTuS
BIG Libertas Fidelitas
|
Posted - 2008.07.04 07:55:00 -
[2]
1) train Paragraphs up from level 0 - this will help -- BIG Lottery, BIG Deal, InEve, USERPROFILE
|
tianjin Yao
blackthorne holdings ltd
|
Posted - 2008.07.04 08:46:00 -
[3]
Originally by: RaTTuS 1) train Paragraphs up from level 0 - this will help
seriously... this
|
Jareck Hunter
Academy of Decadence Hereticus Aegis Communis
|
Posted - 2008.07.04 09:59:00 -
[4]
LaVista Vista (or so) the CSM Representant has this topic in his List and some other industrial/market "features".
I produce for my Corp and we have hangars with puplic access, the only things i have to build are Ships, Ammo and sometimes Drones. Everything else comes from our missionrunners.
I ask myself for what do we need BPOs for Items like Small Shild Boosters, only T2 production?
EvE is know for it's Market and Economy, but how can a market Work, when a lot of items on the market are given away free.
To the first two posters, post something usefull or STFU. People like you and the ones that scream "wall of text, ahh my eyes", should be packed into a cargo container and dropped at a deep-savespot.^^ ------------------------------------------------- Sorry for my bad english^^
Join public Channel "Decadence" or visit www.eve-decadence.de |
Fennicus
Amarr Southern Cross Empire
|
Posted - 2008.07.05 12:18:00 -
[5]
Edited by: Fennicus on 05/07/2008 12:19:08 Edited by: Fennicus on 05/07/2008 12:18:12 Just because you can't sell anything you want for a profit in Jita, doesn't mean you have to cry about it.
If you stopped items from dropping from missions, how do you think that will affect the economy in minor trade hubs - rhe rest of the world outside your own little bubble? A handful of industrialists in obscure areas of the world would just be able to charge what they wanted for popular modules.
People wouldn't be able to melt down their unwanted T1 items into minerals, again giving regional miners carte-blanche to charge what they want for large volumes.
Basically, letting items drop from missions stabilises prices. Sure, overall it's a bit of a deflation-ary effect, but so is letting more people play the game and learn to mine/manufacture, and I don't see CCP considering this as an option.
And what about manufacturing slots, wouldn't it completely overload them? I imagine that would also hit the price of T2 items too since you'd need to wait for a month for a build-spot.
How would this fit into "real life"? Wouldn't you expect to be able to loot a few of the items from the ships you just destroyed? (This is also a case for making some of these modules be damaged, so you have to pay to repair them for resale, or simply reprocess them for the usual quantity of minerals. That sounds much more feasible than your stupid idea of just stopping all drops.)
Basically, you've said there are too many modules on the market, from too many people manufacturing and too many people getting them from missions. Why only suggest that one of these things is nerfed - why not suggest making (unskilled) manufacturing harder to do as well as recommending that fewer T1 items drop from missions?
|
Peadar
Gallente Pillars of Hope
|
Posted - 2008.07.05 16:35:00 -
[6]
very good questions that you raised: What will its impact on the future?
I will say that the production of T1 is a very good start for what came to start Eve Online walk out of the T1 is a rotten missions runner.
Many module are sold on the marcket but even more are reprocess to produce ships behind. I see not only how the fighter would have the opportunity to manage themselves without the help of producer who take their time as upgrade their bpo and mounted their skill to the max produir without loss and the best shot.
The life of the fighter resume as: exploded npc => looter / salvager => reprocess / sell these loots T1, infinity because npc repop permanently.
The miner must look for asteroids, the miner. Out of the asteroids are not infinite, they disappear, forcing the miner as the move to see those empire to go dry with low risk that its leads with all the pirates on Sunday, taking their foot as exploding easy target even if its their reports nothing in the end.
You say that if you remove the T1 of his loot nps going to do that regions will be without module and I'll say yes as a first step because many traders and producers will be delighted with his. Relancerai Its economy is mainly enlFverai its monopoly fighter on the market that is not their field.
I switched already, yes, but its 0.0'll **** shit in my corpo. I will respond to turns in 0.0 we must have a corpo complete with all professions and not just a fighter half producer.
If we remove the loots T1 of npc its force may be pirates not explode as the first barge which traine a low dry and can be as low this dry repeuplera by the same.
You destroy the miners and considers the producer like crap on the pretext that the fighter self manages, I think it is time to stop with this mentality of "I am fighter, I am a god".
|
Peadar
Gallente Pillars of Hope
|
Posted - 2008.07.05 16:43:00 -
[7]
For the production slots for information copy of the slot and ME are overloaded and not prevent us from upgrading our bpo and make install copy on the POS for her, you know, but apparently not noticed a setting as a fighter explode see anything that's not know much actually.
The inventor is a single sperm is full pockets because they are not obliged to spend time upgrade their BPO because all loots T1, they are on mission and do not have the chier produir. They jump a step it is as if the fighter launch a mission and finish immediately but still reach all bounty of npc there had in the missions is not something wrong?
|
Nekopyat
|
Posted - 2008.07.05 18:19:00 -
[8]
Originally by: Fennicus
If you stopped items from dropping from missions, how do you think that will affect the economy in minor trade hubs - rhe rest of the world outside your own little bubble? A handful of industrialists in obscure areas of the world would just be able to charge what they wanted for popular modules.
It would probably help local economys significantly. Topics like this tend to focus on the 'everyone goes to Jita' mantra but in reality every region has it's small time builders. Unfortunately those small time builders quickly discover that the market for T1 items is very limited and thus they either stop building or consider the Jita grind.
By reducing the local influx of NPC generated loot you would encourage the local building community. You would also increase the number of people doing serious trading/hauling since there would be a larger number of items worth moving around (thus more trade volume to be filled).
Though ultimatly, this is one of those cases were we could really use the raw data off CCP. As players we can only guess and assume how loot effects the T1 market.
|
Alex Redwidth
|
Posted - 2008.07.05 22:12:00 -
[9]
Originally by: Nekopyat Topics like this tend to focus on the 'everyone goes to Jita' mantra but in reality every region has it's small time builders. Unfortunately those small time builders quickly discover that the market for T1 items is very limited and thus they either stop building or consider the Jita grind.
As a T1 producer, I wouldn't DREAM of selling my gear at Jita. The regional markets have more than enough demand to meet turnover. Find an area near a couple of 'starter' systems and you'll hit on a gold mine.
|
Shintai
Gallente Balad Naran Orbital Shipyards
|
Posted - 2008.07.05 23:22:00 -
[10]
Agree, removing T1 base loot would remove the massive mineral influx and make manufactoring of said items actually worthwhile.
Boost to miners and industrialist. To compensate increase the bounties or so alittle. Its a win/win. Missions runners dont have to drag useless garbage home. And the others can earn more on minerals and actually produce T1 gear.
--------------------------------------
Abstraction and Transcendence: Nature, Shintai, and Geometry |
|
Jastra
Gallente Black Thorne Corporation
|
Posted - 2008.07.06 09:00:00 -
[11]
Originally by: Fennicus Edited by: Fennicus on 05/07/2008 12:19:08 Edited by: Fennicus on 05/07/2008 12:18:12 Just because you can't sell anything you want for a profit in Jita, doesn't mean you have to cry about it.
If you stopped items from dropping from missions, how do you think that will affect the economy in minor trade hubs - rhe rest of the world outside your own little bubble? A handful of industrialists in obscure areas of the world would just be able to charge what they wanted for popular modules.
People wouldn't be able to melt down their unwanted T1 items into minerals, again giving regional miners carte-blanche to charge what they want for large volumes.
Basically, letting items drop from missions stabilises prices. Sure, overall it's a bit of a deflation-ary effect, but so is letting more people play the game and learn to mine/manufacture, and I don't see CCP considering this as an option.
And what about manufacturing slots, wouldn't it completely overload them? I imagine that would also hit the price of T2 items too since you'd need to wait for a month for a build-spot.
How would this fit into "real life"? Wouldn't you expect to be able to loot a few of the items from the ships you just destroyed? (This is also a case for making some of these modules be damaged, so you have to pay to repair them for resale, or simply reprocess them for the usual quantity of minerals. That sounds much more feasible than your stupid idea of just stopping all drops.)
Basically, you've said there are too many modules on the market, from too many people manufacturing and too many people getting them from missions. Why only suggest that one of these things is nerfed - why not suggest making (unskilled) manufacturing harder to do as well as recommending that fewer T1 items drop from missions?
this
|
Robert Rosenberg
Amarr Imperial Academy
|
Posted - 2008.07.06 09:33:00 -
[12]
Tech 1 production should require more than just two skills TBH.
|
LaVista Vista
|
Posted - 2008.07.06 09:39:00 -
[13]
Removing T1 loot drop is a dream of mine. I don't find it likely quite yet. We need an equal way of balancing the reward.
I would personally like to see the whole loyalty store concept expanded. Remove ISK-faucets in mission by removing bounties. But equally "liquid" types of rewards should be made available. Loyalty points could be that thing, but the type of items that comes from these stores are, by definition, scarce resources. So they shouldn't be THAT common either.
So remove bounties and replace it with something that will make mission runners life as easy(I know it will upset some people to remove the bounties, but the economy cries every time a rat is blown up).
And then make away with all T1 loot drops. Replace it with rig-ish types of components that should be used in production of named variants of modules. But make the components needed for malkuth/arbalest/high-end variants, drop-able in low-sec only.
I realize it's quite a change. But well.
|
LaVista Vista
|
Posted - 2008.07.06 09:41:00 -
[14]
Originally by: Robert Rosenberg Tech 1 production should require more than just two skills TBH.
We discussed this with CCP during the CSM-CCP meetings a couple of weeks ago. CCP will look into expanding the industry skill-set and make it more interesting. Adding more specific skills, like for producing shield items for instance, is something that was very interesting for both CCP and CSM.
I don't want to increase the barrier to entry to the T1 market too much either. But it needs a small buff.
|
Thenoran
Caldari Border Rim Enterprises
|
Posted - 2008.07.06 10:25:00 -
[15]
Edited by: Thenoran on 06/07/2008 10:25:47 T1 components like how Capitals and T2s are made would make it 10x more interesting to start with
For instance you your Caldari Engine Housing needing just a bit of trit and mex, or a Shield Emitter needing bits of Isogen or whatnot. ------------------------ Ore Depletion Calculator It's life Jim, but not as we know it |
LaVista Vista
|
Posted - 2008.07.06 10:52:00 -
[16]
Originally by: Thenoran Edited by: Thenoran on 06/07/2008 10:25:47 T1 components like how Capitals and T2s are made would make it 10x more interesting to start with
For instance you your Caldari Engine Housing needing just a bit of trit and mex, or a Shield Emitter needing bits of Isogen or whatnot.
Yeah, T1 components would be kinda awesome!
|
Kerfira
University of Caille
|
Posted - 2008.07.06 11:10:00 -
[17]
Edited by: Kerfira on 06/07/2008 11:11:01 The main problem is that having the same resource coming from two places is very hard to balance. In this case it is two-fold, first of all T1 items (coming from mission loot and producers), and minerals (coming from mission loot and miners). One of the two ways will always be easier than the other, making the other profession less valuable. It makes it even worse that the mission loot is the secondary reward for mission running, while for producers and miners it is the primary (and only) reward for their work.
Basically, the rewards for different activities should be unique for that activity, ie.: Mining: Ore -> Minerals Production: T1/T2 Items/Ships/Components Moon Mining: Moon stuff Exploration: Invention stuff Salvage: Rig components Missioning: Money + ? etc...
This is actually almost there, except for missions (and NPC'ing which should probably also be adjusted). Missions give out money, but also T1 items (and thus minerals). Instead of the T1 stuff, they should drop something else that couldn't be gotten from some other source. I always thought CCP missed a great opportunity for starting this when they made the Nanite Compound a NPC item instead of replacing some of the T1 drops in missions. Maybe they could take the 'other' POS fuels (oxygen, coolant, robotics etc.) and make those mission drops only (they must be removed as NPC goods to enable a free market to form).
Or maybe T1 stuff should simply be dropped from mission loot without any replacements. High-sec missioning is way too profitable as it is. Even thought I got 2 characters in a deep 0.0 corp, I make my money doing high-sec L4's, simply because it gives me most ISK/hour (when everything is taken into account)...
Originally by: CCP Wrangler EVE isn't designed to just look like a cold, dark and harsh world, it's designed to be a cold, dark and harsh world.
|
Doc Extropy
Gallente Kinda'Shujaa
|
Posted - 2008.07.06 11:16:00 -
[18]
Originally by: LaVista Vista Removing T1 loot drop is a dream of mine. I don't find it likely quite yet. We need an equal way of balancing the reward.
I would personally like to see the whole loyalty store concept expanded. Remove ISK-faucets in mission by removing bounties. But equally "liquid" types of rewards should be made available. Loyalty points could be that thing, but the type of items that comes from these stores are, by definition, scarce resources. So they shouldn't be THAT common either.
So remove bounties and replace it with something that will make mission runners life as easy(I know it will upset some people to remove the bounties, but the economy cries every time a rat is blown up).
And then make away with all T1 loot drops. Replace it with rig-ish types of components that should be used in production of named variants of modules. But make the components needed for malkuth/arbalest/high-end variants, drop-able in low-sec only.
I realize it's quite a change. But well.
I hate the idea of removing bounties. Money HAS to come from somewhere and some people hate looting / salvaging.
On the other hand I LOVE the idea of dropping upgrade components for the production of named variants. Finally the named variants would be available in some meaningful manner and there could be a new industry.
Question is... why not the salvage parts we have now? There are a LOT of them which sell for 100 ISK per piece, CCP could take them and make them the base for variant production.
Something along the lines of:
800mm Steel Plate + 10 Metal Scraps = 800mm Plate Meta 3. 800mm Steel Plate + 20 Metal Scraps = 800mm Plate Meta 4.
etc... ---
Skill queue now! Nerf skillpoint loss and half done skills! WE ARE PAYING CUSTOMERS AND DESERVE MAXIMUM COMFORT! |
LaVista Vista
|
Posted - 2008.07.06 11:22:00 -
[19]
Originally by: Doc Extropy
I hate the idea of removing bounties. Money HAS to come from somewhere and some people hate looting / salvaging.l
Oh, I agree. There has to be SOME degree of money coming into the game. But right now it's just way too much.
How about cutting the bounties in half and replacing it with loyalty points? The "value" should be about the same but it won't let so much isk into the economy, which is bad for everybody.
Here is what you have to consider. The more isk that is being put into the economy, the less isk/hour you make. But if we replace the direct isk faucet with a way of distributing isk by giving people something they can trade for isk, it would make a much more interesting economy without hurting the players.
I don't want to make mission runners think that they will get less out of their mission running. I just want to not have their activities hurt the economy.
|
Doc Extropy
Gallente Kinda'Shujaa
|
Posted - 2008.07.06 11:25:00 -
[20]
Originally by: LaVista Vista
Originally by: Doc Extropy
I hate the idea of removing bounties. Money HAS to come from somewhere and some people hate looting / salvaging.l
Oh, I agree. There has to be SOME degree of money coming into the game. But right now it's just way too much.
How about cutting the bounties in half and replacing it with loyalty points? The "value" should be about the same but it won't let so much isk into the economy, which is bad for everybody.
Here is what you have to consider. The more isk that is being put into the economy, the less isk/hour you make. But if we replace the direct isk faucet with a way of distributing isk by giving people something they can trade for isk, it would make a much more interesting economy without hurting the players.
I don't want to make mission runners think that they will get less out of their mission running. I just want to not have their activities hurt the economy.
Which is true, now I understand.
Hm, tradeable LP for example... that would be great, something like a "LP wall street". ---
Skill queue now! Nerf skillpoint loss and half done skills! WE ARE PAYING CUSTOMERS AND DESERVE MAXIMUM COMFORT! |
|
Carniflex
Caldari Fallout Research Fallout Project
|
Posted - 2008.07.06 12:53:00 -
[21]
Originally by: LaVista Vista
How about cutting the bounties in half and replacing it with loyalty points? The "value" should be about the same but it won't let so much isk into the economy, which is bad for everybody.
Here is what you have to consider. The more isk that is being put into the economy, the less isk/hour you make. But if we replace the direct isk faucet with a way of distributing isk by giving people something they can trade for isk, it would make a much more interesting economy without hurting the players.
I don't want to make mission runners think that they will get less out of their mission running. I just want to not have their activities hurt the economy.
Downside of that would be, that LP 'value' would drop as 'isk' value drops the more you put it into system. LP however has some additional room to drop as it's not as 'liquid' as isk is and thus is able to degrade faster in value.
And then there is another isk fauchet in the equation we are looking, that is then 0.0 people who shoot pirates for bounties. The drone regions are quite nice 'preview' of what would happen if all pirate entities that currently have bounties on them would start giving out some other commodity instead. Whatever commodity it is, the less 'liquid' it is in the sense of 'isk' the faster it will degrade.
So removal of bounties is not the answer you are looking for. Well ok, it would in the sense that it would cut the incoming isk in half that comes into system, but for stability you need just balance between isk fauchets and isk sinks. In my opinion the isk sinks side of the equation is better place to seek that balance than fauchets side as any tampering with the fauchets generates shockwaves in the economy as people tend to overreact and the speed of changes is very fast, while if you tamper with sinks side aftershocks are less likely as sink side seems to have heavier inertia (takes a while for economy to catch up that something has changed, thus the process is less violent most likely like for example setting new higher prices for pos fuel and letting it to migrate there slowly over a month or so).
|
Jastra
Gallente Black Thorne Corporation
|
Posted - 2008.07.06 14:29:00 -
[22]
Originally by: LaVista Vista
Oh, I agree. There has to be SOME degree of money coming into the game. But right now it's just way too much.
Can you qualify this with any form of quantifiable evidence or is this just your opinion?.
|
|
CCP Chronotis
|
Posted - 2008.07.06 15:15:00 -
[23]
To answer the OP, yes we are looking seriously at removing T1 from loot. But we are looking at this from all angles as there are two ways you create opportunity in our foundation industry, decrease supply from non-industrial sources such as removing completed items from loot or increasing demand by finding more ways for people to die (and ofc having fun doing so and being able to replace their ships) and allowing for natural consumption. Increasing consumption has also been suggested through other numerous ideas repeated over the years like 'wear and tear' for example though this is extremely difficult to do as such a system would be singleton attribute based which is tricky for us to implement.
Besides the economic considerations of creating new opportunities and revitalizing the T1 industry through the above or additional layering in the processes such as a new step between minerals and items, we also have to pay attention to the professions. If we were to remove completed modules from loot and replace with components used in meta manufacturing for example, we would want to re-examine rigs (transition to size based rigs) and salvaging in an effort to make sure that those who run missions or belt rat and use the loot to make a living are not too adversely affected by such changes. Globally though the reduction in mineral supply from such a diffuse source would need consideration that the remaining sources can 'pick up the slack'.
It may well be worth reading this thread which looks at the big picture of industry & business which I wrote a large reply with my own thoughts on for some extra insight.
|
|
Zaran Darkstar
Brutor tribe
|
Posted - 2008.07.06 15:43:00 -
[24]
I d say 1) Remove loot from wrecks completely. That will free resources and reduce lag as well. 2) Make the wrecks only availiable for salvaging purposes 3) In the end of the mission have the final boss drop a cargo container with some random named loot.
|
LaVista Vista
|
Posted - 2008.07.06 15:52:00 -
[25]
Originally by: Jastra
Originally by: LaVista Vista
Oh, I agree. There has to be SOME degree of money coming into the game. But right now it's just way too much.
Can you qualify this with any form of quantifiable evidence or is this just your opinion?.
Please check out the second QEN that Dr. EyjoG published. About 200bill worth of isk is being added(That is included the isk that leaves the economy) to the economy every day.
We can very easily see the bad effect it has. Just look at how big commercial isk is.
|
Raymon James
Minmatar Tribal Liberation Force
|
Posted - 2008.07.06 16:52:00 -
[26]
Originally by: CCP Chronotis To answer the OP, yes we are looking seriously at removing or radically reducing T1 from loot. .
Oh HELL No.
Look let me spell it out for you since its obvious from your statments (and yes I read the full thing) that you dont realise that a lot of us get the minerals for our industiral effort from missions BECAUSE WE DONT WANT TO SPEND HOURS ON END SUCKING ON ROIDS WHIlE RATS SIT THEIR NOT EVEN SCRATCHNG THE SHEILDS!
A lot of us have one and only one account for whatever reason, We use bounties & loot to "pay" for our PvP because as it is PvP for most of us is a negative sum game. I personaly scrap the crap (to me) modules for minerals to build ships, and either store or fit any modules that I can peronsaly use.
Here is the reality since you guys seem to fail at understanding basic economic concepts when it comes to MMOs (shocking but true, the last GDC the developers of WoW, EQ, Liniage and FFXI have all shown that they realy did not get it untill recently).
First, In ANY Loss based PVP* (or even loss based PvE) online game the OPTIMUM Entry barier factor to any economic activity is 0. Meaning the only real "Barrier" should be the time invested to get to that point.
you guys have constantly proved this in EVE. And on top of it you have proven that you may have finaly gotten it because you have repetedly addmited that things like how you handled the lottery and Moon resources were bad ideas.
The paradox of this is that its next to imposible for most people to "seriously" profit from that same condition because A)anyone can enter the economy reguardless of demand, and restricting supply only puts you at risk of alientating your "core" playerbase, (thoes engaged in loss based PvP)
and B) The Goal of Loss based PvPs economys is to reduce the "economic cost" of loss based PvP to a minimum
as for the second? Its simple.
you need to be able to provide to the PvP players the tools they need to "pay" for PvP if you have loss based PvP in the game.
once you give them the "economic tools" to pay for pvp, you remove(or "tweek") thoes tools from PvP players only at risk of thoes same PvP players quiting the game.
Its one of the laws of MMO design, please see Ralf Kosters page on the subject of MMO laws.
* loss based PvP is any PvP that results in a loss to the looser, either "game skill" or Economicaly. Lossless PvP games are ones where you bascialy pop up from the dead as if nothing had happend apart from some "score loss"
|
KISOGOKU
|
Posted - 2008.07.06 17:54:00 -
[27]
Edited by: KISOGOKU on 06/07/2008 17:54:50 ISK is blood of eve economy ,if you took isk out economy will die .I have nearly 3m Lp i dont bother to take any item from Lp store atm .If you make a change to Lp Lps will devalued faster than a nanobond can move 2nd point you never thought is who got isk ,some ppl may have a lot isk but a lot of player nearly always broke especially pvpers and you did not take new players to account they need isk more than everybody else This was a terrible idea
Originally by: LaVista Vista
I would personally like to see the whole loyalty store concept expanded. Remove ISK-faucets in mission by removing bounties. But equally "liquid" types of rewards should be made available. Loyalty points could be that thing, but the type of items that comes from these stores are, by definition, scarce resources. So they shouldn't be THAT common either.
|
Carniflex
Caldari Fallout Research Fallout Project
|
Posted - 2008.07.06 19:15:00 -
[28]
Originally by: LaVista Vista
Please check out the second QEN that Dr. EyjoG published. About 200bill worth of isk is being added(That is included the isk that leaves the economy) to the economy every day.
We can very easily see the bad effect it has. Just look at how big commercial isk is.
So. You want to instantly double the 'buyng value' of liquid isk already in game as a cure to that and cut the fauchet in half without tuning isk sinks in any way ?
Or if you would already be tampering with the sinks side then why go for the facuhets at all as you can just fine tune your sinks to reach equilibrium or whatever state you are after. The only problem with sinks as far as I see currently is, that there is no significant isk sinks (other than skills that are one time investment OR some LP rewards that affect only part of population OR insurance that is more like fauchet than sink) on personal scale as major sinks are at corporation level (POS fuel).
|
Jei'son Bladesmith
The Storm Knights The Cool Kids Club
|
Posted - 2008.07.06 19:21:00 -
[29]
As a mission runner/loot reseller myself, i wouldn't be opposed to reducing the lot drops, but increasing the value of said drops, so we go from "oh boy. another 2,000 m3 of crap i gotta unload" to seeing "oh boy! theres something in that wreck! BONUS!"
It WOULD reduce income so a bump to the rat's bounties would be nice (or again drop more valuable but fewer items so the ISK value of the loot is about the same)
also it would reduce the minerals we have (from reproc'ing crap loot) tho that's not necessarily a bad thing - high sec miners could easily (and I think gladly) pick up the slack.
|
Raymon James
Minmatar Tribal Liberation Force
|
Posted - 2008.07.06 21:14:00 -
[30]
here is the paradox
CCP wants more PVP in the game,
that means that bascialy the people who do pvp need to be able to bounce back from their losses faster
theirfor its in the best interests of CCP to do one of two things,
1) radicaly increase the income of PvPers
2) Radcialy decrease the cost of ships-modules
option 1 is out the window because guess what the Developers dont want to see million ISK T1 frigates, so that leaves option 2, somehow decreasing the cost of ships and mods.
however CCP also says they want to make the PvE side more profitable
that means more income for miners and producers. and currently the only way to do that is to raise the prices on existing minerals and ships and mods because currently PvP and PVE players can only go through thoes modules at aat a limmited rate.
Frankly? its to this point with the developers saying anything on the topic of prices in EVE I feel like handing them a jigsaw so they can keep their Pinochio noses from growing too long!
|
|
|
|
|
Pages: [1] 2 3 4 5 6 :: one page |
First page | Previous page | Next page | Last page |